User talk:Adhonorium

February 2022

Hello, I'm Arjayay. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Taj Mahal have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse.
Please stop adding, and re-adding, unsupported infobox parameters - these don't show on the article page and just clutter up the edit page - Arjayay (talk) 16:06, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ToastGuard. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Red Fort, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. -Toast (talk) 19:43, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm INDT. The edits that you recently made to Mughal Empire seemed to be a test and have been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! INDT (talk) 12:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You've maniacally desecrated the Maratha Empire Wikipedia page on accounts of your Hindu-phobia. I'll be carefully monitoring your activities here, and see to it that your account is blocked in this regard. I dealt with such miscreants like you before and won't tolerate any further. You better take my warning seriously. Bramhesh Patil (talk) 11:21, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Red Fort, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 23:09, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discretionary sanctions alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 23:10, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Third Battle of Panipat does not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits a summary may be quite brief.

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! -- Toddy1 (talk) 12:50, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Third Battle of Panipat, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:50, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You added the following paragraph to the article on the Third Battle of Panipat.

However, it is very possible that Ahmad Shah Abdali, instead of admiring the Marathas, as commonly believed by his Marathi detractors, was obliquely accentuating his own military prowess by first valorizing his enemies and later making the point that he heavily and decisively crushed them.

I have not deleted it, because it looks like a very good observation. But it is unsourced. Readers must be able to check that any of the information within Wikipedia articles is not just made up. This means all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. Additionally, quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by inline citations. See Wikipedia:Verifiability.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:53, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a paragraph about (a) massacres after some other battle and (b) judgments about the quality of the Maratha army after the heading "Massacres after the battle" was unhelpful. But at least that paragraph had a citation. You made other edits that mainly seem to have consisted of unexplained unsourced edits to cited text - in at least one case removing the citation.-- Toddy1 (talk) 14:18, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Hey man im josh. I noticed that in this edit to Mughal–Maratha Wars, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:13, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. RegentsPark (comment) 18:21, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please also treat this as a gentle reminder, since I notice you've never used them, that article talk pages exist. Rather than attempting to continually insert your content into pages, try getting consensus on the talk page first. --RegentsPark (comment) 18:22, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 2022

Hello, I'm Mr.weedle. I noticed that in this edit to Mahmud Begada, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Mr.weedle (talk) 17:26, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Battle of Delhi (1737). Your edits could be interpreted as vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use your sandbox. Thank you. ∆ P&t ♀√ (talk) 23:39, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

In light of your recent edit to the result of the Mughal-Maratha Wars, I have read your Cambridge (reliable publisher) reference and it does mention a Mughal pyrrhic victory, however, the author of the book is a sociologist and not a qualified historian. Therefore, a single source by a non-specialist does not carry sufficient weight to warrant a change against a view supported by reputable publications of several historians. Welcome to challenge this on the talk page. WP:RSUW, WP:ONUS Fayninja (talk) 11:07, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Hello, your edit on Shivaji did not appear to be constructive. Please don't add new information without providing reliable sources. Thank You SKAG123 (talk) 20:40, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. RegentsPark (comment) 00:52, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You're again adding content without discussion and edit warring. Note that the duration of blocks will escalate and you should definitely consider using the talk page and sourcing your content additions. --RegentsPark (comment) 00:54, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

April 2023

Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I noticed that in this edit to Shahi paneer, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 10:14, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]